Background to this inspection
Updated
17 November 2018
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place over three days on 18, 20 and 21 September. People using the service were contacted by telephone as part of our inspection of the service.
Before the inspection we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the information in the PIR, along with other information that we held about the service including previous inspection reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.
We contacted the local authority contracts and commissioning team to gather their views of the service. We received no negative feedback. During our inspection we spoke with the registered manager, a care co-ordinator, a training and recruitment officer, an administrator, a senior care worker and four care workers. At the time of our visit the service was providing personal care and support to 94 people. There were 70 members of staff employed at the time of our inspection.
We spent the first and second day of the inspection at the provider’s registered office, speaking with staff and looking at records. These included care plans and associated documentation, staff recruitment files, staff training records, supervision records, various policies and procedures and other documents relating to the management of the service.
On the third day of inspection we visited three people in their own homes and spoke with them to gather their views on the service. These visits included meeting, speaking with and observing staff who were there to provide support for the person. We looked at paperwork kept on file in people’s homes relating to their care after asking for the individual’s permission.
Updated
17 November 2018
This inspection took place on 18, 20 and 21September 2018 and the first day of inspection was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience. On 20 September 2018 we made telephone calls to people who use the service to gain their views and experiences of the service.
Human Support Group – Sale, also known as HSG Homecare - Sale and referred to as HSG - Sale in this report, is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support to people in their own homes to help them remain independent. HSG - Sale also provides other elements of support such as sit-in services, domestic support and welfare checks.
The service is managed from an office in Sale, Trafford with care and support provided for people living in the areas of Trafford, for example Altrincham, Stretford and Sale. The length of visits for care and support vary depending on the assessed needs of people. At the time of this inspection, 94 people were in receipt of a service and 70 staff were employed on the day of our inspection. However, not everyone using the service receives regulated activity; the Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
At the time of this inspection there was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
At the inspection of April 2017, we rated the service overall as Requires Improvement. At that inspection, we found breaches of Regulations 9 and 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because risks were not managed properly and support plans did not contain detailed information for staff to provide person centred care.
Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions of safe, responsive and well led to at least good.
During this inspection, we saw the provider had taken the measures identified in their action plan. In addition, they had sustained previous good practice in other key areas. As a result of this inspection, the service has an overall rating of Good.
There were more robust systems in place to ensure that risks to people's safety and wellbeing were identified and addressed. Risk assessments included information for staff about the risk and any measures they should take to minimise the chance of harm occurring to an individual.
People supported with medicines were kept safe and received the correct medication. Practical competency reviews were completed with all staff to ensure best practice was being followed.
The manager and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and, worked to ensure people's rights were respected. People had access to healthcare services and received healthcare support, sometimes as a result of intervention or advice from care staff.
The service worked with relatives and others to raise the awareness of dementia. Two planned Dementia Awareness sessions went ahead and were attended by relatives, staff and a health professional. People were supported with the preparation of meals and drinks where this had been identified as a care and support need during the assessment process and any specific dietary needs were documented.
Staff were kind and patient in their approach and did not rush people, letting people do things at their own speed. People were treated with dignity and respect and received care and support specific to them, depending on individual preferences. People told us that staff were caring and carried out additional tasks when they needed extra support.
People received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. Care plans were written in the first person and contained information about people’s histories and past lives. This gave care workers insight into those they were caring for and helped shape the delivery of care.
People benefitted from a service that was now well led. The vision, values and culture of the service were clearly communicated to staff and the registered manager invested time with staff to make sure these were understood.
There were processes in place to monitor quality and understand the experiences of people who used the service. Staff we spoke with were complimentary about the service and their colleagues and proud of the work they did.
The service had forged links with the community and a local befriending charity, owned by the Human Support Group but operated independently, had an on-site representative based at the Sale branch. The service referred or signposted people to this charity.